where the "Hitler should have listen to his general " come from?

[Peter89]

Happy return general .

xD

The return of the Panzer General

I think it is a good question though. Why there are still so many people who believe that the Wehrmacht was "clean"? What is your angle on this matter?

[Aida1]

It is not about the Wehrmacht being clean or not.It is about officers being loyal to their oath and not to a particular regime because of getting money for it.Many younger officers later loyally served the Bundeswehr.

[Hanny]

I disagree with your interpretations.You turn rewards into bribes which they never were.

Except that how AH described them. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/31 ... b_contents or try http://www.richardjevans.com/lectures/c ... ird-reich/

[Aida1]

I disagree with your interpretations.You turn rewards into bribes which they never were.

Except that how AH described them. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/31 ... b_contents or try http://www.richardjevans.com/lectures/c ... ird-reich/

Giving bonuses to commanders is not a bribe.You cannot be 'bribed' for doing what you are supposed to do and for a loyalty that would be a given anyway.Giving big bonuses to high ranking staff is the most normal thing in private companies.And the alleged bribes seem to have missed their alleged purpose given the quarrels Hitler had with his commanders and the long list he sacked.And 'bribing' a sacked commander would be utterly useless.

[Hanny]

Giving bonuses to commanders is not a bribe.You cannot be 'bribed' for doing what you are supposed to do and for a loyalty that would be a given anyway.Giving big bonuses to high ranking staff is the most normal thing in private companies.And the alleged bribes seem to have missed their alleged purpose given the quarrels Hitler had with his commanders and the long list he sacked.And 'bribing' a sacked commander would be utterly useless.

Its nice you disagree with how AH saw the bribes, but until education min UK and USA stops teaching thats what he did and why, your not going to get much joy.https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/a ... alCode=jmh

You can also use wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bribery_o ... t_officers if you cant access the links.

[Aida1]

Giving bonuses to commanders is not a bribe.You cannot be 'bribed' for doing what you are supposed to do and for a loyalty that would be a given anyway.Giving big bonuses to high ranking staff is the most normal thing in private companies.And the alleged bribes seem to have missed their alleged purpose given the quarrels Hitler had with his commanders and the long list he sacked.And 'bribing' a sacked commander would be utterly useless.

Its nice you disagree with how AH saw the bribes, but until education min UK and USA stops teaching thats what he did and why, your not going to get much joy.https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/a ... alCode=jmh

You can also use wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bribery_o ... t_officers if you cant access the links.

The article in Wiki is An example of how things are thrown together and links are imagined that did not exist.Guderian got an estate while he was out of employment and not when he was inspectorgeneral of armor supposedly to make him positive about Zitadelle.You Will find no serious history of Kursk repeating that utter nonsense.Given his rocky relationship with Hitler the alleged 'bribe' seems not to have worked.But Guderian was always politically loyal with or without an estate.And Leeb getting an estate in 1943 would be pretty useless as he was out employment. Given what was achieved in 1940 and 1941 it is very normal senior commanders would be rewarded.They earned their rewards.

[Hanny]

The article in Wiki is An example of how things are thrown together and links are imagined that did not exist.Guderian got an estate while he was out of employment and not when he was inspectorgeneral of armor supposedly to make him positive about Zitadelle.You Will find no serious history of Kursk repeating that utter nonsense.Given his rocky relationship with Hitler the alleged 'bribe' seems not to have worked.But Guderian was always politically loyal with or without an estate.And Leeb getting an estate in 1943 would be pretty useless as he was out employment. Given what was achieved in 1940 and 1941 it is very normal senior commanders would be rewarded.They earned their rewards.

You did bother to look at how its taught right?. Or have read a book on the subject?https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=WXo ... ry&f=false

Im sure those convicted of receiving bribes, or committing perjury in denial of the same despite the archival records,at Nuremburg will get compensation and an apology .

[Aida1]

The article in Wiki is An example of how things are thrown together and links are imagined that did not exist.Guderian got an estate while he was out of employment and not when he was inspectorgeneral of armor supposedly to make him positive about Zitadelle.You Will find no serious history of Kursk repeating that utter nonsense.Given his rocky relationship with Hitler the alleged 'bribe' seems not to have worked.But Guderian was always politically loyal with or without an estate.And Leeb getting an estate in 1943 would be pretty useless as he was out employment. Given what was achieved in 1940 and 1941 it is very normal senior commanders would be rewarded.They earned their rewards.

You did bother to look at how its taught right?. Or have read a book on the subject?https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=WXo ... ry&f=false

Im sure those convicted of receiving bribes, or committing perjury in denial of the same despite the archival records,at Nuremburg will get compensation and an apology .

OH really.The Wikipedia article you cite is a good example of crap.Guderian is even supposed to have only quarrelled with Hitler after his estate was occupied by the red army.You will not read that nonsense in any serious history work.Guderian was always outspoken with or without an estate.And you would be hard put to come up with senior German commanders being convicted in Nürnberg for alleged bribery by Hitler.You make links which do not exist.Receiving a reward and being loyal are not linked.I am not surprised that the book you cite starts by wiping off the table that officers could consider themselves bound by the oath they took.Without that the whole bribery theory would collapse.Well,officers did consider themselves bound by their oath and few broke it and mostly very late in the war. The political loyalty was a given for most German officers.And even the rewards given did not prevent them from quarelling on military matters with Hitler,many getting sacked.This whole bribery theory is a typical example of a pet theory to which facts are made to conform.

[Hanny]

OH really.The Wikipedia article you cite is a good example of crap.Guderian is even supposed to have only quarrelled with Hitler after his estate was occupied by the red army.You will not read that nonsense in any serious history work.Guderian was always outspoken with or without an estate.And you would be hard put to come up with senior German commanders being convicted in Nürnberg for alleged bribery by Hitler.You make links which do not exist.Receiving a reward and being loyal are not linked.

Or, even wiki is better informed than yourself.

The answer to my own question, is you have not read the links i posted.

[Aida1]

OH really.The Wikipedia article you cite is a good example of crap.Guderian is even supposed to have only quarrelled with Hitler after his estate was occupied by the red army.You will not read that nonsense in any serious history work.Guderian was always outspoken with or without an estate.And you would be hard put to come up with senior German commanders being convicted in Nürnberg for alleged bribery by Hitler.You make links which do not exist.Receiving a reward and being loyal are not linked.

Or, even wiki is better informed than yourself.

The answer to my own question, is you have not read the links i posted.

I did and the Wikipedia article is nonsense.That part about Guderian is laughable.The part about Mackensen even contradicts itself.Is what happens when you interpret history through the narrow view of a pet theory and making evertthing conform to it.Nothing more dangerous than being victim to dogma.

[Hanny]

I did and the Wikipedia article is nonsense.That part about Guderian is laughable.The part about Mackensen even contradicts itself.Is what happens when you interpret history through the narrow view of a pet theory and making evertthing conform to it.Nothing more dangerous than being victim to dogma.

Well since your the one with a pet theory, arguing against how its explained in books by R Evans etc, the generals themselves viewing the awards as bribes in their accounts, AH reserving to himself the sole authority to bribe as he did and so on, we are back to who has a pet theory, unsupported by the evidence.

[AbollonPolweder]

...
Awards to commanders to do the jobs they are supposed to do are never bribes.A bonus given to a manager in a Company is not a bribe either.They are rewards.There is a historical tradition for awarding military commanders rewards for services rendered.That goes back very far in human history.Hitler did not do anything original there.Professional soldiers who are not mercenaries do not need to be given money to make them loyal.And An award given after a commander is sacked would certainly not be very useful if that would be the intent.

You believe, for example, OKH was a private company, and von Leeb or Guderian were managers? Tell me the law of the 3rd Reich, which indicated the size of bonuses to generals and field marshals.

...
Wrong..Professional soldiers served their country under different political regimes.The older ones had served under the Kaiser,the Weimar Republic and the Thiird Reich.They are loyal to their country,not a particular political system.They did take their oath seriously.Nothing you wrote here contradicts that.You are simply interpreting and making connections that do not exist.Rewards do not become bribes solely when German officers get them.

After 1934, the Germans began to serve primarily to the political system, moreover, personally to Adolf Hitler. Read this oath:
"I swear by God this holy oath, that I want to offer unconditional obedience to the Führer of the German Reich and people, Adolf Hitler, the commander-in-chief of the Wehrmacht, and be prepared as a brave soldier to risk my life for this oath at any time. "
I do not recall such a "country" as the "Führer" or "Adolf Hitler."

[Aida1]

I did and the Wikipedia article is nonsense.That part about Guderian is laughable.The part about Mackensen even contradicts itself.Is what happens when you interpret history through the narrow view of a pet theory and making evertthing conform to it.Nothing more dangerous than being victim to dogma.

Well since your the one with a pet theory, arguing against how its explained in books by R Evans etc, the generals themselves viewing the awards as bribes in their accounts, AH reserving to himself the sole authority to bribe as he did and so on, we are back to who has a pet theory, unsupported by the evidence.

I just had a look in GFM Von Leeb Tagebuchaufzeichnungen und Lagebeurteilungen in Zwei Weltkriegen DVA 1976 which shows again how stupid that Wikipedia article is.The real Von Leeb was an officer highly critical of Hitler who did not agree with many things but accepted to serve his country after being sacked a first time before ww2 because of being too catholic.He eventually resigned because of the many disagreements with Hitler. The real German officers do not conform to your caricature.They we're loyal to their country.Leeb was one of those.

[Aida1]

...
Awards to commanders to do the jobs they are supposed to do are never bribes.A bonus given to a manager in a Company is not a bribe either.They are rewards.There is a historical tradition for awarding military commanders rewards for services rendered.That goes back very far in human history.Hitler did not do anything original there.Professional soldiers who are not mercenaries do not need to be given money to make them loyal.And An award given after a commander is sacked would certainly not be very useful if that would be the intent.

You believe, for example, OKH was a private company, and von Leeb or Guderian were managers? Tell me the law of the 3rd Reich, which indicated the size of bonuses to generals and field marshals.

...
Wrong..Professional soldiers served their country under different political regimes.The older ones had served under the Kaiser,the Weimar Republic and the Thiird Reich.They are loyal to their country,not a particular political system.They did take their oath seriously.Nothing you wrote here contradicts that.You are simply interpreting and making connections that do not exist.Rewards do not become bribes solely when German officers get them.

After 1934, the Germans began to serve primarily to the political system, moreover, personally to Adolf Hitler. Read this oath:
"I swear by God this holy oath, that I want to offer unconditional obedience to the Führer of the German Reich and people, Adolf Hitler, the commander-in-chief of the Wehrmacht, and be prepared as a brave soldier to risk my life for this oath at any time. "
I do not recall such a "country" as the "Führer" or "Adolf Hitler."

Ridiculous.Few German German officers were nationalsocialists.They swore fidelity to Hitler in his capacity as head of state and commander in chief of the Wehrmacht.They did not really like the wording of the oath.You only have to look at those purged away before ww2 to know that many senior commanders we're not trusted by Hitler including for example Von Leeb.German officers were patriots in the first place.The whole theory of bribes as the sole motivation for their loyalty is completely ridiculous and ignores how German officers really thought.Given land to a military commander goes back far in history Nothing unusual in that.

[Cult Icon]

Is there any proper study on this subject besides a couple of <judgmental> sentences in a few books?